Jump to content

Talk:Mitsubishi Cordia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cordia as a coupé

[edit]

I've left in User:ApolloBoy's hatchback tag. However, please note the following sources:

  • Mitsubishi Motors South Africa calls it a hatchback here [1], and then when you click through that link, calls it a coupé here [2]. Thanks, Mitsubishi, you're a really big help...
  • Carfolio.com - the 1600 turbo is referred to as a 2+2 FHC (fixed head coupé) here [3].
  • Compare the height of the Cordia with the Mitsubishi Tredia in both articles (figures culled from Carfolio.com [4] and Auto.vl.ru [5]. The Cordia has a roofline two inches lower than the sedan. Hatchbacks have the same roofline, at least in Britain, and the original author is using British English.
  • Also, in Britain, it's more likely to be a coupé than a hatchback if the rear passengers' headroom is compromised by the slope of the rear glass, caused by a shortened roofline - hatchbacks are basically the same as sedans from the C-pillar forwards except in a very select few cases. If you look at the article image, the Cordia is the same only from the B-pillar forwards.
  • The ol' Google test: "Cordia coupe" gets 378 hits, "Cordia hatchback" gets 87 (revised figures as of 2006-07-06).

I don't dispute that it's very borderline, hence I've left the hatchback tag in. However, equally, there's more than enough evidence to keep the coupé tag as well.
Regards -- DeLarge 14:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Edited -- DeLarge 23:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious: is there any reason why the external links are indented? Haven't seen that before. But since I've read your request to... a certain someone — regarding the div tags, I've not interfered in case this is a rendering/compatibility issue too! I'd be interested to know though. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 23:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I use the colon at the start of the line to avoid them all running together on a single line. I suppose I should use the asterisk to bullet them, or just put <br> to prevent any indentation. Or I could <insert alternative method I'm not aware of>. If someone had edited that I wouldn't have minded. I'll go poke around some WP:FAs and see what the favoured standard is.
Regards -- DeLarge 00:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Having checked the vehicle pages at [WP:FA#Transport]] (e.g. Ford Mustang, Mini, etc), they seem to use a bulleted list, so I'll edit that.
Cool. And don't worry, I'm not assuming you're an anti-changes ogre! ;-) Bullets certainly seem to be the standard, at least the de facto one, on most other non-motoring articles I've worked on. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 11:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mitsubishi Cordia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:19, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Passage with mostly opinion

[edit]

The paragraph beginning "Many Cordias suffered from poor manufacturing techniques in late models from the AB onwards..." was originally a very long run-on sentence, with many comments that read like opinion or advertising ("quickly extinguished this new competitor", "absolutely left Mitsubishi in the dust"), entirely lacking any citations. I have attempted to copy edit and add some wiki links to separate out factual information from opinion, but perhaps someone more knowledgeable about the subject should continue. Kbseah (talk) 00:26, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mitsubishi Cordia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mitsubishi_Cordia&oldid=1202623349"